Connect with us

Culture

How Jews Gave America Gay Marriage

Voice Of EU

Published

on

This article has nothing to do with Russia, but we are running it here in keeping with my commitment to publish articles that fairly and honestly discuss the influence of Jewish elites, particularly when it is malevolent, which I believe it often is.

The refusal of most media to discuss Jewish influence is causing huge problems both domestically and in foreign relations. I discuss this at length in my article It’s Time to Drop the Jew Taboo.

The Russian angle on this story is that Russia, both its people and its government, has remained staunchly opposed to this cultural Marxist encroachment by gay activism. This is in part because Jewish elites have far less influence in Russia in the media, among NGOs, and in government. It makes a huge difference.

Charles Bausman, Editor


Fash the Nation is the most popular Alt-Right podcast with a very large weekly audience. it is essential listening to understand what is going on in the US from a conservative viewpoint. It also features an excellent regular feature called ‘The Europa Report’, covering the European migrant crisis.


Since gay marriage was legalized in 2015 the American public has seen that the slippery slope from legal gay marriage to trannies in girls locker roomsto troubled children given hormone blockers is real. And Americans aren’t too happy about it: as Alyssa Rosenberg lamented in the Washington Post, the number of Americans who express discomfort around LGBT people has risen for the first time since 2014.

In light of this, it’s worth looking back at how this slippery slope began and how gay marriage was legalized in the first place.

An interesting perspective on this subject can be found in an article published in 2014 by Tikkun Magazine titled “How Jews Brought America to the Tipping Point on Marriage Equality” which details how “Jewish activists gathered enough force to help push the state-by-state dominoes over to legalizing same-sex marriage” and how “Jews can claim a fair share of the credit for bringing Americans to a tipping point of accepting marriage equality.”

This may sound like a shocking anti-Semitic accusation to some, especially to those Evangelical Christians who seem to think Jews are God’s Chosen People™ who can do no wrong, but this article was written by a Jewish activist in a Jewish magazine. Tikkun Magazine is named after the Jewish concept of “tikkun olam,” which means “repair the world” in Hebrew.

In the article, Amy Beam explains not only how Jewish activists and social organizations pushed the gay marriage issue, but also how their victories can serve as a blueprint for other “social justice” issues—which in the near future will probably include such things as taking “trans” children away from parents who refuse to allow them to transition genders and labeling anyone with a conservative view of sexual morality a mentally ill sexist, homophobe or bigot.

The first lesson from the Jewish fight for gay marriage, Amy Beam explains, is taking a clear moral stance:

“By coming out early with a clear moral position rooted in religious values and coordinating their message at the national and state levels, Jewish leaders helped reassure voters who may have been unsure about the religious implications of voting for marriage equality.

As early as 2007, Rabbi David Saperstein, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, wrote in an op-ed in the Washington Post: “We have reached a point in American society where the obvious is clear: neither my marriage nor anyone else’s is threatened by two loving individuals of the same sex. And it is increasingly difficult for religious leaders to envision that the loving God of the Universe does not welcome such faithful relationships.”

The shift in attitudes is a deep one, according to a recent poll cited in a report in The Atlantic this past summer: “Even among the most conservative Christian group in America, 51 percent of white evangelicals aged 18 to 34 now support gay marriage.” And polls say Jews themselves now support marriage equality to the tune of over 80 percent. Susskind suggests it is no accident that Jews embraced same-sex marriage. “As the narrative on marriage equality in the country has moved,” he says, “Jews—as people who value equality, value civil rights, and have a long historical understanding of what it means to be discriminated against—are consistently at the front of that.”

First, note how Jews here utilize religion to their own political ends. They realize that many Christians in America, who erroneously and often unknowingly follow a dispensationalist theology, view Jews as a uniquely holy people, as a people who have their own covenant with God. So Jews use their own status to couch their left-wing political opinions in religious terminology, and then they sell those opinions as uniquely moral to American Christians. Most American Christians, unfortunately, are more than willing to gobble it up. After all, God’s Chosen People™ couldn’t be wrong, could they?

This is a view that we have to be willing to challenge on a fundamental level. The correct Christian worldview is that the Jews aren’t God’s Chosen People any longer, they lost their covenant with God the moment they rejected Christ and killed Him.

Second, note how Jews view their own influence in society and how they explain why they champion left-wing causes: “Jews – as people who value equality, value civil rights, and have a long historical understanding of what it means to be discriminated against.” In other words, their support for left-wing “social justice” issues like gay marriage, Black Lives Matteropen borders, and so on isn’t a mere political opinion—it is inherent to their ethnic and religious identity, an identity shaped by being a minority in every country that they lived in for well over 1,000 years.

In their own eyes, the Jews are on a crusade against all forms of discrimination, real or perceived. And it doesn’t matter how reasonable the discrimination they’re fighting is, e.g. discrimination against trannies in girl’s locker rooms or unvetted migrants from radical Muslim countries flooding into the West.

This mentality isn’t held by a small Jewish elite but by a majority of rank-and-file Jews, as the article mentions later:

“Noting the recent Pew poll that showed that 70 percent of Jews vote and 56 percent say that being Jewish means working for justice, Abby Levine, director of the Jewish Social Justice Roundtable wrote in a November 22 op-ed in Zeek magazine that she sees a rise in Jewish involvement in “projects dealing with economic justice, women’s rights and community organizing.” Jewish social justice organizations are primed to train and mobilize even more faith-based activists to take on this next wave of struggles.

“We [Jews] bring a different paradigm than the typical paradigm of the policy marketplace, which is a paradigm of morals,” says Susan Lubeck of Bend the Arc’s Bay Area office in California. “Of what’s fair and right and good, and not just what is politically appetizing.”

Unmentioned here is that the vast majority of Jews vote for liberal Democrats, regardless of whether or not they think that “being Jewish means working for justice.” Their support for left-wing “social justice” politics is rooted in their understanding of their own identity, which is why any attempt to win over Jews to the right will be doomed to fail.

But to get back to the meat of the article, Amy Beam explains the other “lesson” from the Jewish fight for gay marriage and other social justice issues in America, the necessity of a solid ground game:

“Jewish activists and leaders at both the national and local/regional levels spearheaded the recent wave of victories for marriage equality (such as state-by-state legalizing of same-sex marriage and the defeat of the Defense of Marriage Act). “We did it in a variety of smaller ways,” says Susskind. “[We had to] get rabbis signed on, get other community leaders signed on, do calling drives, get people engaged with their state legislators.” Susskind cites the work of regional Jewish groups as key to winning in several states; these include Jewish Community Action (JCA) in Minnesota, Jews United for Justice in Maryland, and Bend the Arc’s regional offices in Los Angeles and the Bay Area in California.

State Senator Scott Dibble of Minnesota said the work of JCA was “very important” in two major recent fights there: defeating a 2012 amendment to the state’s constitution that would have banned same-sex marriage, and the subsequent passage of a state law that legalized it. “They provided lots of organizational support.” Dibble said. “The support came in many forms, a lot of it very practical and tangible. JCA arranged for meeting space in several different synagogues as we were getting underway.” Beyond providing such material assistance, Dibble said JCA was “also just a real key force and driver in the aspect of the campaign that relied on bringing the faith voice to the forefront.”

Again, Jewish organizations played a “very important” role in pushing for gay marriage. So no, it’s not an anti-Semitic conspiracy.

The article goes on to mention several other ways that Jewish organizations lobbied their local and state governments for gay marriage as well as “economic justice” issues like higher minimum wages:

“In the Washington, DC, region, JUFJ worked alongside workers’ rights groups to pressure the city council into scheduling the December 17 vote to pass an $11.50 an hour minimum wage. DC councilmember Tommy Wells, who is currently running for mayor on a progressive platform, said, “Right off the bat, I was impressed” by JUFJ’s organizing on paid sick days and the minimum wage. “They held some events that I went to. And they met with me. I appreciated how clear they were on exactly what they wanted to happen.”

What they wanted to happen was for the city council to bring DC’s minimum wage into alignment with the surrounding Maryland region of Prince George’s and Montgomery counties. There, the county councils in November passed the same increase—to $11.50 by 2017—following intense organizing by JUFJ and other groups. “We organized a lot of ways for Jewish people to contact their representatives,” said Ennen. “Jews, like anybody else, don’t necessarily participate that much in local politics. Jews do tend to be pretty hooked into progressive politics nationally, or national issue campaigns, but lots of people who are involved in JUFJ had never called their actual county representative. It turns out,” she went on, “that county elected leaders aren’t used to the level of lobbying that Congress is. So it doesn’t take hundreds of phone calls and thousands of petition signatures. They’re receptive to hearing from their constituents. So we did a lot of work to mobilize people to have those meetings and make those calls. That was one of the ways that we were able to win in Montgomery County.”

This highlights an important lesson that the right-end of the political spectrum needs to learn from: politics doesn’t end at the ballot box.

Notice how in addition to voting a certain way, pushing out certain messages through the media and religious organizations, etc. these Jewish organizations actively engage in large-scale and well-organized grassroots lobbying campaigns. They encourage their members to call and write their representatives, participate in petition drives, etc.

This is something that the right-wing has to do more of. Too often we’re satisfied by donating some money to our favorite candidates, voting, and then sitting at home and occasionally sharing something on Facebook or Twitter. Worse still, on the rare occasion that a relatively good guy like Donald Trump wins, we satisfy ourselves by thinking that no follow up is needed, “he’s got it in the bag.” But that isn’t enough.

Just like these Jewish lobbies, we have to learn to start engaging more with our elected officials, local, state, and federal. When important votes for issues come up, call your Congressman, Senator, or county representative. Tell them how they have to vote if they want your support next election cycle. The thing is legislators actually listen because they do want to get re-elected at the end of the day. And the more feedback they get from their constituents, the more likely they are to vote with them.

If we do not start engaging more heavily with this kind of grassroots lobbying then we’re letting the groups that do win the game completely unopposed.

Source link

Culture

External investigation into Department ‘champagne party’ needed – Minister

Voice Of EU

Published

on

Minister of State Anne Rabbitte has called for an external investigation into a “champagne party” held by staff in the Department of Foreign Affairs staff in June 2020.

The gathering, which appeared to breach Covid-19 guidance in place at the time, was “inexcusable” and Minister Simon Coveney and his department have further questions to answer, the Fianna Fáil TD told Saturday with Katie Hannon on RTÉ Radio One.

“Having a champagne reception in any government department at that time, I know over in the Department of Health where they worked tirelessly for 23, 24 hours a day, it was far from champagne they were having,” she said.

Ms Rabbitte said an internal report conducted by the department’s current secretary general was not a satisfactory way to handle the matter.

“It’s still within the same department, and we know the answer we will get. I would be one for openness and transparency … it has to be [an external report].”

She added that all departments needed to learn from the mistake.

Officials were photographed in the department celebrating Ireland’s election onto the UN Security Council, and the image was posted on Twitter by the then secretary general Niall Burgess. The tweet was later deleted. At the time of the event, there were strict restrictions on the size of gatherings due to Covid-19.

Speaking on the same programme, Labour TD Duncan Smith said people were angered at the event because June 2020 was a bleak time for most people in Ireland. He said the public had seen other incidents where politicians and others were accused of breaching Covid-19 restrictions.

“These are the elites of society … what has really hurt people is that it really got to the ‘we are all in this together’ philosophy.”

Sinn Féin TD David Cullinane agreed there needed to be an independent review of the matter, adding that Mr Coveney needed to come before an Oireachtas committee and the Dáil to gave a “frank and full account” of what happened.

Source link

Continue Reading

Culture

Dog-owners bite back at beach rules

Voice Of EU

Published

on

Following a series of reports that An Taisce is leading the battle to ban dogs from the State’s 83 blue-flag beaches, the organisation’s Ian Diamond is feeling misunderstood.

“I don’t hate dogs”, Mr Diamond says, pointing out that Blue Flag International – the global body which governs the coveted awards – warned last year that some qualifying beaches were not honouring long-standing rules.

Under what’s known as Criterion 23, the rules declare that beach access “by dogs and other domestic animals must be strictly controlled” and that they be allowed only in “the parking areas, walkways and promenades in the inland beach areas”.

Faced with the reminder, Mr Diamond said he requested last year that local authorities get more time, as it was “not something that can be introduced immediately in the middle of a pandemic when people are under other restrictions.

“You can’t exactly introduce these things overnight, so we were flagging that,” he said, adding that Blue Flag told them to speak to people seeking blue flag status and “come back with proposals” that comply with the rule.

The issue came to national attention following a meeting of Kerry County Council this week, though it was understood then that the rule was an An Taisce demand, rather than being a Blue Flag International obligation.

Dogs and horses

Consequently, Kerry County Council now propose that dogs or horses will not be allowed on blue-flag beaches from 11am-7pm between June 1st and September 15th, or otherwise the county could lose its 14 blue flags.

However, the restrictions are unpopular with some dog-owners: “There’s a lot more important things to be worrying about than dogs on a beach,” said David Walsh, as he walked his pet, Oreo, on Salthill beach.

Dog-owners in Salthill are already not allowed to bring their dogs onto the beach between 9am and 8pm between May 1st and September 30th each year, in line with Blue Flag International’s rules, though penalties are rare.

Mr Diamond says a national application of the rules at blue-flag beaches would not “strictly prohibit dogs being on the beach” during bathing season, outside of peak hours.

Bathing season

“The blue-flag criteria would apply from June 1st to September 15th, within peak usage hours, so bathing hours – that would be mid-morning to early evening,” said the An Taisce officer.

“What it requires is that there would be rules in place in relation to dogs that say [they] should not be in the blue-flag area within those hours and within the bathing season,” Mr Diamond said.

The restriction is based on public health grounds and dates back to 2003: “Dog faeces actually contain a lot of the micro-organisms that cause illness in the same way that human waste would,” he said.

“There’s no zero-tolerance approach to this. If rules are going to be brought in, then people will be consulted as well, you know, brought in unilaterally, and it’s down to the councils responsible for the beaches to bring those in.”

Not everyone disagrees with An Taisce, or Blue Flag: “I don’t think dogs should be on the beach, because of the kids and all that. And a lot of people don’t pick up their poo afterwards,” said a man on Salthill beach.

Source link

Continue Reading

Culture

Jail for banned motorist from Limerick caught driving on Christmas shopping trip to Belfast

Voice Of EU

Published

on

A banned motorist from Limerick caught driving on a Christmas shopping trip to Belfast has been jailed for seven months.

Police also discovered three of Leeanne McCarthy’s children not wearing seat belts when her car was stopped on the Westlink dual carriageway.

The 41-year-old mother-of-eight initially gave officers a false identity, prosecutors said.

Belfast Magistrates’ Court heard a PSNI patrol car stopped the Ford Focus on November 26th last year.

McCarthy, with an address at Clonlough in Limerick, provided a different name and claimed she did not have her licence with her.

However, checks revealed that a month earlier she had been banned from driving for five years.

A Crown lawyer said: “Three young children were in the rear of the vehicle, none of them wearing seat belts.”

McCarthy initially claimed they only removed the safety restraints when the car came to a halt, the court heard.

Police were told that she took over driving duties from another daughter who had been tired and nearly crashed the vehicle.

McCarthy was convicted of driving while disqualified, having no insurance, obstructing police and three counts of carrying a child in the rear of a vehicle without a seat belt.

Her barrister, Turlough Madden, said she had travelled to Belfast for Christmas shopping.

Counsel told the court McCarthy spent the festive period in custody, missing out on sharing it with her eight children and four grandchildren.

“That’s been a wake-up call and significant punishment for her,” Mr Madden submitted.

“She is a mother who simply wants to go back to Limerick and not return to Northern Ireland.”

Sentencing McCarthy to five months imprisonment for the new offences, District Judge George Conner imposed a further two months by activating a previous suspended term.

Mr Conner also affirmed the five-year disqualification period and fined her £300 (€350) for the seat belt charges.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our mailing list to receive the latest news and updates 
directly on your inbox.

You have Successfully Subscribed!